PromoTheRobot Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Shanny is so desperate he bring in JaWalrus Russel for a tryout. A tryout at QB, not DE, though Russell did weigh in at 285. PTR
Mr. WEO Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Well, Cutler was a very raw talent coming out of college. The Broncos took their lumps during those years. They had a atrocious defense, which, ultimately, was Shanahans' downfall in Denver. I think it is funny that so many are noting that Shanahan has done a bad job with the Redskins. His approach, IMO, is exactly what the Bills need...no knock on Gailey, but I can almost guarantee you, Shanahan, had he come to Buffalo, wouldn't have wasted so much time trying to determine if Trent Edwards could play QB. He likely already had drawn his conclusion. Shanahan is stepping into a very dysfunctional atmosphere in Washington, where there is a culture of big salaries, with little production. He is putting his stamp on the franchise. It appears, McNabb isn't in his future plans for the Skins, and Albert Haynesworth is an albatross around the franchise neck, with his ludicrous salary. MS came in, established that Haynesworth wasn't giving them the effort commensurate with his bloated salary, and made an example of him, saying, "this **** isn't going to go on here anymore, under my watch." He made an example of him, just as he is of McNabb. This is pretty much the same tact that Parcells, Belechik, and all their "disciples" taken, when they arrive in a new situation. I agree with Buftex. All these guys who are taking shots at Shanahan are whistling past the graveyard. "I'm happy with Buddy and Chan", "what have they done in DC with Shanny and Allen?". And the predictable (and misinformed) notion that Shanahan only won SBs because of Elway. The truth is that he lost a couple with Elway in his prime. Elway only won a SB (or 2) when Shanny brought in a decent running back at the tail end of Elways career. Shanahan isn't Andy Reid, who seems to be unable to confront players (or others) with character flaws detrimental to the team. Players are coming out of the woodwork now to second Shanny's assessment of McNabb's work habits. Anyone who disagrees with his handling of Haynesworth would never survive as any kind of manager of employees. He is what he is--a no nonsense ball buster with a bit of an ego. Gailey is none of those.
Malazan Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 Shanahan isn't Andy Reid, who seems to be unable to confront players (or others) with character flaws detrimental to the team. Players are coming out of the woodwork now to second Shanny's assessment of McNabb's work habits. Anyone who disagrees with his handling of Haynesworth would never survive as any kind of manager of employees. He is what he is--a no nonsense ball buster with a bit of an ego. Gailey is none of those. Well, there are those rumblings that the issue is more about players not believing his son is up for the job and that they're going to scapegoat McNabb.
Doc Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 (edited) Well, there are those rumblings that the issue is more about players not believing his son is up for the job and that they're going to scapegoat McNabb. I guess that could explain the huge 13 yards and 2.9 points per game increase on offense the Skins are seeing this year. And players are now starting to come out of the woodwork to "throw McNabb under the bus?" Interesting. The Skins will be lucky to win 6 games this year. The Bills might win a couple. Big whoop. Edited November 4, 2010 by Doc
joemac Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 Mikey is quite the little drama queen isn't he. I agree with Buftex. All these guys who are taking shots at Shanahan are whistling past the graveyard. "I'm happy with Buddy and Chan", "what have they done in DC with Shanny and Allen?". And the predictable (and misinformed) notion that Shanahan only won SBs because of Elway. The truth is that he lost a couple with Elway in his prime. Elway only won a SB (or 2) when Shanny brought in a decent running back at the tail end of Elways career. Shanahan isn't Andy Reid, who seems to be unable to confront players (or others) with character flaws detrimental to the team. Players are coming out of the woodwork now to second Shanny's assessment of McNabb's work habits. Anyone who disagrees with his handling of Haynesworth would never survive as any kind of manager of employees. He is what he is--a no nonsense ball buster with a bit of an ego. Gailey is none of those. I do believe Dan Reeves was coaching during Elway's previous SB losses.
Kultarr Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 Oh, he changed the roster. As did Nix. But have the changes resulted in anything meaningful? A few Cornell Green types is hardly what I'd call "changing the roster".
Mr. WEO Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 Mikey is quite the little drama queen isn't he. I do believe Dan Reeves was coaching during Elway's previous SB losses. My error. Elway couldn't win a SB until Shanahan showed up and established a running game.
mattsox Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 My error. Elway couldn't win a SB until Shanahan showed up and established a running game. Oh, so that's it. Tell me now? How many SB have New England won since they haven't had an established RB? Hmmm? I don't remember Tom Brady winning a Super bowl on his own either. But I guess that's just me talking crazy talk...
Doc Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 Elway was a HOF'er without Shanahan. If Shanahan makes it into the HOF, he can thank Elway for it. The question is, did the Skins get the Shanahan from a decade ago, or the one whose teams made the playoffs 4 times out of 9 seasons post-Elway and only won 1 playoff game? I guess we'll find out, just like we'll find out about Gailey.
Recommended Posts